<br />r.
<br />
<br />-: ~".,,~~V~~ '~. p,-:
<br />
<br />152
<br />
<br />PUBLIC LAND LAW REVIEW
<br />
<br />[Vol. 15
<br />
<br />1994]
<br />
<br />GRAND CANYON PROTECTION ACT
<br />
<br />153
<br />
<br />A final issue results from the significant costs of the comprehensive
<br />activities that are to take place under the GCPA. Section 1807 grants the
<br />Secretary the authority to use funds received from the sale of electric power
<br />to prepare the EIS and to conduct the long-term monitoring program.
<br />These costs are "nonreimbursable" and will be added to the outstanding
<br />amount due under the CRSPA, meaning federal taxpayers will ultimately
<br />pay the costs involved.lle
<br />The GCPA is a congressional attempt to protect the natural and
<br />cultural environment downstream of Glen Canyon,by d~~ning_t_he_priori-
<br />ties under which DOl must operate the dam. TiI~'la-w_Qfth'e 'riv"er"ii itill"
<br />paramount in dictating releases,;hut now the'prote'8'd8fi~f;'dGW:futii~;~t'm
<br />resources lakes-priority over a1l9th~r.values. InJact.thelegislatill.e.histol"Y,,,
<br />indicates that the ,GCP A sij.eCiflcally rejects the, .,,~2,~~?n ~h~J ~~~'_"('-
<br />generation-:has"a-ny priority over protection"of downstream enV'ironlhental,
<br />recreational; o~ cult'ural va~ues.117 This reordering of priorities, recogniz-
<br />ing traditionally overlooked values, is by itself enough to make the GCP A a
<br />significant piece of legislation. What remains to be seen is whether the
<br />GCP A is a model to be used in settling other controversies Concerning the
<br />use of natural resources in this country.
<br />
<br />reform legislation, enacted in part to arrest the deterioration of fish TUns in
<br />the Upper Columbia River Basin, 120 Also, similar to the situation at Glen
<br />Canyon Dam, a diverse number of interest groups use the Columbia River
<br />~nd therefore are very concerned with any changes in the status quo. These
<br />mterest grou~s include utilities, recreationists, commercial fishing inter-
<br />ests, and Native Americans.121 Due to similarity with the issues involved at
<br />Glen Canyon, the Northwest Power Act serves as a standard for reform-
<br />type legislation. Although it is still too early to determine the overall
<br />success of the Northwest Power Act,lU it has had a significant effect on
<br />reorderi~g priorities in the Northwest12a ind therefore appears to be an
<br />approprIate standard to follow.
<br />
<br />v. STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE GCPA
<br />
<br />This Section evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the GCP A by
<br />analyzing how the legislation deals with certain questions common to
<br />natural resource issues. First, does the Act establish an overall goal and set
<br />of priorities that can be used to guide activities that are undertaken
<br />pursuant to its provisions? Second, are scientific data used, as appropriate,
<br />to direct the planning? Third, is the decision-making process open to all
<br />parties who are affected by the issue at hand? Finally, does the legislation
<br />promote overall efficiency in the use of natural resources? As a means of
<br />comparison, the analysis will use the Pacific Northwest Electric Power
<br />Planning and Conservation Act (Northwest Power Act)118 as an example
<br />of natural resource reform legislation that addr~ses the above questions.
<br />The Northwest Power Act was signed into law on December 5,1980
<br />for the purpose of developing, in tandem, a region-wide energy plan and a
<br />comprehensive program to protect and enhance fish and wildlife re-
<br />sources.l19 The Northwest Power Act is similar to the GCPA in that it is
<br />
<br />A. Go,!! Setting & Reordering of Priorities
<br />
<br />, Legi~lation affecting the use of natural resources should, and usually
<br />does, specify an overall goal or objective.124 This provides a reference point
<br />by which all activities under a program can be measured. Even more
<br />important than a broad objective is a strong statement as to what values
<br />should take precedence when competing uses come into conflict.
<br />The Northwest Power Act lists a number of goals in its mission
<br />statement. These goals include assuring an efficient, economical power
<br />supply while encouraging conservation, protection, and enhancement of
<br />the fish and wildlife resource of the Columbia River and its tributaries.125
<br />Most significant is a provision that ele.~tes anadromous fish to the status of
<br />a co.equal partner with energy production.U6 Although the Northwest
<br />Power Act does not specifically establi"ih a hierarchy of prioritjes, it gives
<br />the Northwest Power Planning Council (Council) a defined mission and.a
<br />set of equal obligations to which it must adhere.1t7
<br />,
<br />/
<br />
<br />]16. GCPA ~ 1807.
<br />117. 138 CONGo REC. Sl7,832 (daily cd. Oct. 8, 1992) (questions and statements by Sen.
<br />McCain & Sen. Bill Bradley).
<br />118. ]6 US.C. ~ 839 (1988 & Supp. IV 1,992).
<br />119. Micbael C. Blumm & Brad L Jobnson, Promising A Process for Parity: The Pacific
<br />Northwest Electric Power PJanning ami Conservation Act ami Anadromo/lS Fish Protection. II
<br />
<br />ENVTl. L. 497, 499 (1981).
<br />120. Jd. at 501.
<br />121. See generally id. at 549.55.
<br />122. Salmon runs are far from fully recovered. See Paul Koberstein, The Decline and Fall of
<br />Salmon. HIGH COUNTRY NEWS, Nov. IS, 1993, at 1. '
<br />123. CHARLES F. WILKINSON. CROSSING THE NEXT MERIDIAN; LAND, WATER, AND THE
<br />FUTURE OF THE WEST 210-] 6 (]992) (setting out cbanges in operation or tbe Columbia River dams
<br />made pursuant to tbe Acc that benefilsa]monat the eltpense or hydropower production.)
<br />124. For eumple, the Clean Water Act set out the goal ofllshable and swimmable waters. Sel!
<br />33 U.s.C.! ]251 (1988 & Supp. IV 1992).
<br />125. 16 U.s.C.! 839.
<br />126. 16 U.S.C. 839b(h)(II)(A)(i). See also WILKINSO~, supra note 123, at 210.
<br />127. The Cou~cil was c~ated under the Northwest Power Act and charged with managing tbe
<br />hydropower resource III the Pacific Northwest. Spedllcally, its responsibilities include; (I ) developing a
<br />progra.m to help fish and wildlife, in particular salmon and steel bead runs affected by hydroeleclric
<br />dams III tbe Columbia River Basin; (2) preparing a plan 10 meet energy demands of the Pacific
<br />Northwcst;and (3) encouraging broad Pllblic participation in developing both t he fish & wildlife
<br />program and the p:lWer plan. John M. Volkman & Kai N. Lee. Within Ihl! Hund'tdth Mtridian:
<br />
<br />,
<br />
<br />.'\
<br />."~
<br />':c:tJf:
<br />\,
<br />
<br />
|